Closed editorialbot closed 2 years ago
Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:
@editorialbot commands
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
@editorialbot generate pdf
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=0.03 s (502.7 files/s, 34938.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python 11 102 82 579
Markdown 2 49 0 193
TeX 1 9 0 81
YAML 1 0 0 16
Standard ML 1 0 0 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 16 160 82 870
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository
Wordcount for paper.md
is 1003
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.21105/joss.00027 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty407 may be a valid DOI for title: Nextstrain: real-time tracking of pathogen evolution
- 10.2807/1560-7917.es.2017.22.23.30544 may be a valid DOI for title: PulseNet International: Vision for the implementation of whole genome sequencing (WGS) for global food-borne disease surveillance
- 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00375 may be a valid DOI for title: A comparative analysis of the Lyve-SET phylogenomics pipeline for genomic epidemiology of foodborne pathogens
INVALID DOIs
- None
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@editorialbot query scope
@lskatz – due to the small size of this code, the editors will now discuss if it meets the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. We should get back to you sometime next week.
Submission flagged for editorial review.
👋 @lskatz - I'm sorry to say that after discussion amongst the JOSS editors, we have decided that this submission does not meet the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. Please see https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages for other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work.
@editorialbot reject
Paper rejected.
Thank you for your consideration @danielskatz @arfon @luizirber. We strongly believe that this is crucial software for genomic epidemiology and therefore adds value to public health, but at the same time we want to respect the integrity of the journal. We will continue to work on this software. If we substantially add onto the software and add use-cases to the documentation to reflect its importance, could it be reconsidered for submission to JOSS?
Yes, certainly. We are trying to balance publishing on useful software and being seen as publishing substantial work similar in effort to other journals, which is sometimes tricky.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@lskatz<!--end-author-handle-- (Lee Katz) Repository: https://github.com/tongzhouxu/mashpit Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): master Version: v0.9.2 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Arfon Smith
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @lskatz. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
The author's suggestion for the handling editor is @luizirber.
@lskatz if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).
Editor instructions
The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type: